On the morning of July 25, 2005, Michael Graham unleashed a verbal tirade against Islam. Graham, the host of a morning talk show on Washington D.C.’s WMAL radio, stated 23 times during his three-hour program that “Islam is a terrorist organization” and “the problem [of extremist terrorism] is not extremism ... the problem is Islam.” Not decrying any particularly terrorist organization or extremist faction, Graham chose to propagate the notion that Islam itself breeds radical terrorism. Such an inflammatory statement, particularly in the tense years following the 9/11 terrorist attacks in America, provoked a wide range of emotions for Graham’s listeners. As a result of his incendiary remarks and the public backlash that followed, WMAL decided to fire Graham that following month.

Our reactions, as members of the present looking upon the past, most likely fall into two ideological camps. Either WMAL was justified in firing Graham because those remarks are politically (and perhaps ethically) volatile, or WMAL acted in the repression of free speech and should have kept Graham’s program.

Graham said about his termination, "As a fan of talk radio, I find it absolutely outrageous that pressure from a special interest group like CAIR [Council on American-Islam Relations, an organization that advocated for the dismissal of Graham from the station] can result in the abandonment of free speech and open discourse on a talk radio show."

While Graham felt that his removal from his program was a violation of his free speech, such feelings are a result of a misunderstanding as to what exactly the right to free speech is. Many Americans have a similar misunderstanding regarding the right to free speech. We take our rights for granted. We don’t even bother to understand where they start and where they stop, who threatens them or who supports them. In response to such misunderstandings, this article aims to highlight three elements to our understandings of free speech: what it is, what it isn’t, and why it matters. While some universal principles of free speech will be addressed, this article will focus on free speech in the American context.

What Free Speech Is and Isn’t

The right to free speech is established in the Constitution within the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Under the First Amendment, our common right to free speech only applies to our relations with government and its entities, not between private groups and their employees. While Michael Graham criticized WMAL for hampering his free speech when he was fired, WMAL was not violating the First Amendment. There is no constitutional provision to protect any one person’s expression of speech from being hampered by an organization, because sometimes it is not in the best interests of an organization to allow free speech. WMAL found opposition to Graham to be damaging to its own interests, and thus removed Graham. Such "repression" of free speech in the context of a private company or organization may be on moral or financial grounds, but either way reflects the interests of the private organization, not the government (that being said, there are provisions for the protection of whistleblowers, although such circumstances are separate from this discussion).

Can your freedom of speech be silenced by a company, organization or institution? Absolutely. Any grievance towards a media organization or corporation for limiting free speech should be voiced and duly noted, but it does not violate your constitutional protections.

So, Americans, stop citing the First Amendment when a talk show host gets fired or Facebook updates their policies to allow fake news to be flagged. These are the actions of a private group, not the government. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that an atheist walks into a Christian church and demands an audience because he has a right to free speech. His dismissal by the church would in no way be a violation of his right to free speech, as any private organization may bar someone from speaking something which they disagree with. This would be neither a hate crime, nor an injustice. Regardless of political or moral affiliations, everyone must recognize such separations and designations.

The intentionality behind the First Amendment and the protection of free speech is that we must protect ourselves from government censorship. Once public opinion begins to be censored -- even the unpopular public opinion -- our government cannot call itself democratic. We are not a free people. Only when every view (even those views which are deeply offensive to most) is allowed to be shared are we living in a free society. Free speech is not going to be favorable to all (that is, after all, part of its intention), but the existence of the right to free speech is in the interest of all.

To read more on free speech, check out: The American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty International and Freedom House.

Why Free Speech Matters

Free speech is under attack throughout the world, and perhaps will be in America as well. Just weeks ago on December 30, 2016, Canadian-Turkish citizen Ece Harper was arrested in Turkey for allegedly posting criticisms of Turkey’s President Erdogan on Facebook. Facing a sentence of four years in prison for criticizing her president, Harper represents the plight of those who do not live with the protections of free speech that we have in America. South Korea, home to one of the most active internet censorship programs in the democratic world, deleted tens of thousands of internet pages in 2013, justifying its actions as attempts to regulate morality and decency. South Korea's actions violate some of the most basic common understandings of the preservation of free speech.

Is this the internet age that we are approaching? One in which political leaders utilize the mechanism of the internet to subject the people to their propaganda, eradicating opposing thought? The concerns of free speech, in America and around the world, are increasingly relevant as telecommunications advancements have allowed for an observational state to develop. Without proper protections, legal and otherwise, governments possess the capabilities to monitor and manipulate their populations like never before.

The internet must be vigilantly protected with the concerns of the freedoms of speech and expression at the forefront. As not only Turkey and South Korea but also the notoriously authoritarian Russia, Egypt and China restrict free speech on the internet, so the rest of the free world must work to combat such obstructions. As Americans, without ideological plurality we would be not a free population but an oppressed population. Such a future is possible if we allow our leaders the authority to override constitutional provisions of the First Amendment (i.e., through the Patriot Act and the National Security Agency).

Thus, it is up to us as citizens to demand the protection of our right to free speech. Here are some things you can do to protect freedom of speech at home and abroad:

• Engage in local, legal and nonviolent protests regarding issues you are passionate about.
• Educate your friends about the conditions of constitutionally-protected free speech and the dangers of a lack of free speech.
• Support organizations and policies that keep our leaders accountable.
• Write to your representatives to encourage the protection of free speech in the US while discouraging American support of foreign nations that repress dissent by restricting free speech.

Regardless of your personal political, religious, ideological or philosophical opinions, the universality of free speech is necessary for the protection of everyone’s rights. Instead of protecting our own speech out of self-interest, we must ensure that everyone has an equal, unalienable right to speak what they desire to speak, and to listen to what they desire to listen to. Such a state paves the way to freedom for all.